Originally posted by Carlos Hampton:
I do the version explained by Harry Lorayne in one his booklets, I believe is called my favorite card tricks.
His version is also impromptu. I was wondering if you can point out the differences between the Grant's version and Lorayne's if any. Thanks in advance.
The Lorayne version "Out of This Universe", if performed as outlined in his book "Close-up Card Magic" is quite convoluted (but still very good). I suspect most people who perform it may in fact be doing a scaled down variation.
As listed in Close-up Card Magic, the handling sequence of events (and this is *after* the open separation ruse- which is a different effect altogether) is...
1) Deal four Bridge hands, and reassemble.
2) Allow spectator to deal four bridge hands at random.
3) Two freely selected quarters shuffled together, the other two then shuffled together.
4) The two halves shuffled together.
5) Spectator deals the cards at random into two piles.
6) These two piles are shuffled together.
7) Spectator deals three piles
8) Performer predicts number of red and black cards in center pile.
9) Remaining piles shown to be all red, and all black respectively.
Quite an exhausting effect, but also very perplexing. If one is going for a "challenge" piece, this is certainly it. Perhaps it is best suited for formal performances, or as an effect "for the boys."
The Grant Nu Way Out of This World is certainly more elegant, and much closer to the original OOTW. The biggest difference to the original being that the deck is freely shuffled, and the first half of the pack dealt by the magician who looks at the cards (into piles chosen by the spectator).
The Grant version as viewed by Eugene Burger, while wonderful, still suffered from two of the same "problems" as in the original. In his booklet "Intimate Power", Eugene effectively solves these problems through presentation. He also emphasizes the point that with the Grant variation you do not need to use the entire deck. In other words, the deck can be shuffled by the spectator, and a portion (perhaps a 3rd) used for the effect. This makes for an even more economical effect, and perfect for table workers.
With these things in mind, the two aforementioned variations of OOTW are quite contrary to one another. Each has strengths depending on what the performer is looking for.
Hope this was of help.